[00:00:02]
TEST. JANUARY 7TH, 2021 HEARING OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH CODE ENFORCEMENT APPEALS BOARD IS NOW CALLED TO ORDER. THE SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE A QUORUM. WE HAVE ADDED THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO TONIGHT'S AGENDA. I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE BASED -- IT'S APPROPRIATE BASED ON YESTERDAY'S ACT OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM AND THE ATTACK ON OUR DEMOCRACY.
[3.1 The minutes for December 3, 2020, are presented for approval.]
>> HAS EVERYONE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THE
MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3RD? >> YES, SIR.
>> ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS? >> IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES? SO MOVED.
>> SECONDED. >> CLERICAL THE ROLL, PLEASE.
[4. OLD BUSINESS]
AGENDA. DOES STAFF HAVE ANY CHANGES ORADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA? >> NO, WE DO NOT.
>> UNDER OLD BUSINESS I WOULD LIKE A QUICK REPORT ON FIRST READ WHICH WAS OUR CASE FROM THE LAST MEETING.
401 FIRST STREET. ON BOARD BUSINESS, SOME OF HAD CONTINUING DISCUSSION WITH MICHELLE OVER THE YEARS ABOUT PROVIDING ASSISTANCE TO HOMEOWNERS WHO ARE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO CORRECT VIOLATIONS.
I THINK WE WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN THAT DISCUSSION AT THE END OF
THE MEETING. >> 409 FIRST STREET.
THE HOME IN POOR CONDITION AND NOT SECURE.
THERE HAD BEEN -- MEETING OR TWO GO THERE HAD BEEN SOME HOMELESS FOLKS THAT THE POLICE WERE CALLED AND THEY WERE ESCORTED OUT AND THAT HAPPENED A COUPLE OF TIME.
IT'S A REAL PROBLEM FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE'S A BUYER FOR THE PROPERTY THAT APPROACHED THE CITY.
IT'S A CASH BUYER. IT MAKINGS IT A LOT EASIER.
WE HAVE OVER 17,000 OF FINES THAT ARE STILL RUNNING BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE.
WE HAVE ABOUT JUST UNDER $1,000 IN ADMINISTRATIVE FEES AND COST.
THE POTENTIAL PURCHASER CAME TO THE CITY COMMISSION AND ASKED FOR REDUCTION OF THE FINES. THERE'S A LARGE MORTGAGE OF ABOUT $160,000 ON THE PROPERTY. AND THEN THERE'S AN OLD LIEN I THINK IT'S BY THE CITY IN THE OLD DAYS WHEN WE HAD OUR SOLID WASTE SERVICE IN THE CITY HAD PROVIDED A DUMPSTER.
IT'S A DUMPSTER LIEN. THEY NEVER PAID FOR THE DUMPSTER. THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF LIEN AND 17,000-PLUS THE PURCHASER CLAIMS HE CLAIMS IT MAKE IT REALLY UPSIDE DOWN SITUATION. THE SELLER ALREADY HAS TO COME
[00:05:02]
TO THE TABLE WITH CASH ON TOP OF THE PROPERTY.AND HE ASKED IF THE COMMISSION WOULD CONSIDER THAT.
AND I BELIEVE IT WAS COMMISSIONER ROSS THAT PROPOSED THAT THE COMMISSION REALLY THE INTEREST WAS COMPLIANCE AND THE STRUCTURE ITSELF IS REALLY UNSAFE.
IT HASN'T BEEN DEEMED SUCH. IT'S MORE OR LESS UNSAFE.
THEY WANTED TO GET THE HOUSE DEMOLISHED.
WHAT THE PURCHASER WANTS TO DO ANYWAY.
THEY AGREED TO REDUCE THE FINES TO $1,000 OR THE TOTAL COST TO $1,000 WHICH INCLUDES THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEES AND COSTS.
UNDER THE CONDITION THAT THE PURCHASER PUT 12,000 INTO AN ESCROW ACCOUNT BEFORE THE CLOSING WHICH IS SCHEDULED TENTATIVELY FOR NEXT WEEK THAT ESCROW ACCOUNT WOULD BE IF YOU WILL INFAVOR OF THE CITY IF HE DOESN'T DO THESE TWO THINGS.
ONE, APPLY FOR A DEMOLITION PERMIT WITHIN 14 DAYS OF THE CLOSING DAY WITH THE CITY. AND, ACTUALLY HAVE THE PROPERTY DEMOLISHED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF ACTUALLY RECEIVING THE PERMIT.
BECAUSE WE'RE NEVER SURE EXACTLY HOW LONG IT WILL TAKE TO RECEIVE A PERMIT. WE CAN'T SAY YOU HAVE TO GET THE PERMIT IN CERTAIN TIME. NOT UNTIL THE HOUSE IS ACTUALLY DEMOLISHED WILL THE ESCROW FUND BE RELEASED TO THE PROPOSED PURCHASER. THOSE ARE THE CONDITIONS THE CITY WOULD SIGN THEN PROCEDURALLY A SATISFACTION OF LIEN THAT WOULD BE PRESENTED AT CLOSING BUT WE WOULD HAVE $12,000 IN ESCROW. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT
THAT? >> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.
IF I DIDN'T MISUNDERSTAND. DID THE CITY MANAGER ALSO MEET OUR REQUEST FOR THE CITY TO GO IN AND CLOSE THE FACILITY DOWN SO THAT ADDITIONAL PERSONS COULD NOT ENTER THE PROPERTY?
>> I HAVE TO LEAVE THAT TO MISS FORRESTER.
IT DIDN'T COME TO ME IN WRITING. MICHELLE MAY HAVE COMMUNICATED IT. I DON'T REMEMBER.
BEFORE YOU BEGIN. EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO WISH YOU HAPPY BIRTHDAY. IT'S YOUR BIRTHDAY WEEK.
>> THANK YOU. CODE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTOR.
THE CITY MANAGER DID ASK TO DELAY THE SECURING OF THE PROPERTY. HE WANTED AN ADDITIONAL FINDINGS OF FACT TO BE SENT CERTIFIED -- HARRIET, MISS DAVIS? HAS THAT COME BACK YET THE GREEN
>> I DIDN'T THINK IT WOULD. WHEN I GET BACK ON MONDAY, I WILL CHECK AND SEE WHERE IT IS AND EL IN THE DELIVERY OF THAT.
I DON'T ANTICIPATE GETTING IT BACK.
IT ALL OF A SUDDEN ALL RIGHT SENT FIRST CLASS MAIL.
WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED THAT BACK. I WILL -- I HAVE ANOTHER MEETING WITH THE CITY MANAGER FRIDAY. I WILL SEE WHAT HE WANTS TO DO.
>> YOU MENTIONED 611. >> SORRY 409.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN THE QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEEDING. WE HAVE THREE CASES ON THE AGENDA. BECAUSE NONE OF THEM HAVE BEEN MOVED OFF OF THE AGENDA. WE HAVE THREE CASES ALL BEING CONDUCTED AS QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING WHAT THAT MEANS, FIRST, CITY STAFF AND I BELIEVE WE'LL HAVE MR. WELLS AND MISS FORSTROM WOULD PRESENT. -- JUST MR. WELLS.
CODE OFFICER WILL PRESENT EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY IN THE RECORD IN EACH OF THE HEARINGS. HE WILL TAKE AN OATH BEFORE WE GET STARTED. AND THEN THE RESPONDENT PROPERTY OWNER OR THEIR AGENT WILL COME TO THE PODIUM AND IDENTIFY BY NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU WILL TAKE AN OATH IF YOU SPEAK.
EVERYTHING WE DO HERE UNDER OATH AND PROVIDING SYSTEM AND EVIDENCE FOR THE RECORD. YOU MAY ASK THE CITY MR. WELLS, QUESTIONS. HE MAY ASK YOU QUESTIONS.
AND IF THERE ARE ANY EFFECTED PARTIES, NEIGHBORS, THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT WISH TO SPEAK OR PROVIDE TESTIMONY ANDERS PLEASE TAKE THE OATH. YOU ALSO WILL BE PRESENTING TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE AND YOU CAN ALSO CROSS-EXAMINE OR ASK QUESTIONS OF THE CITIES AND OTHER PARTIES.
IF THERE IS DECISION MADE TONIGHT THAT AN EFFECTED PARTY
[00:10:04]
WISHES TO APPEAL, THAT APPEAL MUST BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS TO THE CIRCUIT COURT. AND IT'S ABOUT 35 DAYS AFTER THE CHAIR SIGNS THE WRITTEN FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS? >> THANK YOU.
ANY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD HAVE ANY EX-PARTA CONVERSATION WITH REGARD TO THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT?
>> THE FIRST CASE IS DAVID M. AND BRITNIC. WALDO, 728 SOUTH
[5.1 DAVID M. & BRITNI C. WALDO, 728 S. 6TH STREET, CASE 2020-0315.]
SIXTH STREET CASE 2020-0315. VIOLATIONS OF THE FERNANDINA BEACH CODE OF ORNANCES SECTION 22-101.87, 845. ARE THERE WITNESSES THAT NEED TO
BE SWORN IN FOR THIS CASE? >> PLEASE SWEAR IN THE
WITNESSES. >> RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
DO YOU SWEAR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY ANDERS YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH.
THE CITY WILL GO FIRST. YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK THE CITY QUESTIONS AND AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE COMPLAINT AT THE PODIUM. IF YOU WANT TO GO THERE NOW.
YOU CAN GO THERE NOW. IT'S UP TO YOU.
MR. WELLS. >> GOOD EVENING, BOARD.
AND MEMBERS ON THE ZOOM. THIS CASE HAS SPANNED OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. I'M GOING TO TRY TO EXPLAIN AND I'M PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO USE MISS FORSTROM TO TESTIFY A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CASE. BECAUSE IT WAS KIND OF PRIOR TO WHEN I STARTED WORKING WITH THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH.
AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE ALL OF OUR EVIDENCE AND PICTURES AND DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD.
>> DID YOU RECEIVE THE DOCUMENTS?
>> NO OBJECTIONS TO THOSE GOING INTO THE RECORD.
>> NO OBJECTION. THEY ARE IN THE RECORD.
NOVEMBER 1ST OF 2017 WE RECEIVED COMPLAINT ABOUT WORK THAT HAD BEEN DONE ON THE PROPERTY WITHOUT THE REQUIRED BUILDING PERMITS. MISS FORSTROM INSPECTION FOUND THAT TWO SHEDS AND EXTENDED FENCE INTO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ENCLOSED PORE WCH NEW WINDOWS AND DOORS ELECTRICITY HAD BEEN RUN TO THE NOW PORCH. A CHICKEN COUP HAD BEEN ERECTED WITH CHICKENS. NOVEMBER 2ND, 2017, NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS SENT TO OWNER BY CERTIFIED MAIL REQUESTING THEY CONTACT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND THE BUILDING OFFICIAL BY NOVEMBER 9TH, 2017. ABOUT PULLING THE REQUIRED PERMITS FOR THE MODIFICATIONS DONE TO THE FRONT PORCH ALONG WITH THE SHEDS AND THE STRUCTURE THAT WERE ADDED TO THE PROPERTY.
NOVEMBER 17TH. 2017, WE RECEIVED A SIGNED RETURNED RECEIPT CARD FROM THE POST OFFICE FROM THE CERTIFIED LETTER WITH THE OWNER'S SIGNATURE ON IT GIVEN ITS PROPER SERVICE. SOMETIME DURING 2018 MISS FORSTROM WILL TESTIFY THE RESPONDENT WAS INFORMED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL TONY PEREZ THAT THE OWNER WOULD HAVE FILE ENGINEERING REPORT OR STUDY OF THE WORK THAT HAD BEEN COMPLETED WITHOUT A PERMIT TO BE ABLE TO MAKE APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT FOR THE WORK IN QUESTION. AUGUST 12TH, 2020 WHEN I REALLY GOD GOT INVOLVED IN THIS CASE. THERE WERE OTHER ITEMS NOTED AT THIS PROPERTY. THIS IS WHEN I GOT INVOLVED WITH THE CASE AND KIND WRAPPED UP ALL OF IT.
ON AUGUST 12TH, MISS FORSTROM SPOKED WITH MR. WALDO ABOUT THE
[00:15:03]
CASE. HE STATE HEAD WOULD REMOVE THE WINDOW FROM THE FRONT PORCH. OBTAIN A PERMIT FOR CHICKEN COUP AND SHED, HE TORE DOWN THE OTHER BUILDING IN THE REAR.HE WOULD REPLACE CHAIN-LINK FENCE WITH WOODEN FENCE AND BRING THE FENCE BACK TO ITS PROPERTY ALONG WITH THE NECESSARY FENCE PERMIT. SET INSPECT UP FOR 30 DAYS LATER. OCTOBER 19TH, 2020, A NOTICE OF VIOLATION NOTICE HEARING LETTER SENT TO OWNER BY CERTIFIED MAIL.
GIVING THE OWNER TEN ADDITIONAL DAYS TO CORRECT THE VIOLATIONS OF 42173, 78-845 AND 30 DAYS GIVEN FOR PERMITTING OF THE PORCH AND THE SHEDS. WE DID RECEIVE ON OCTOBER 23RD, THE SIGNED AND RETURNED RECEIPT BACK.
THE PREAGENDA INSPECTION THAT WE DID ON DECEMBER 21ST, ALL THE VIOLATIONS HAD BEEN CORRECTED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PERMITTING PROCESS, NO PERMIT HAVE BEEN APPLIED FOR AND NO PERMITS HAD BEEN PULLED. LET ME SHARE SOME PICTURES WITH
THESE ARE PICTURES THAT WERE TAKEN THIS MORNING.
THIS IS THE FRONT PORCH THAT'S IN QUESTION.
THIS BUZZ WAS ORIGINALLY IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, WHICH IT WAS UNTAGGED. THEY MOVED IT TO THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE WHICH IS NOT COMPLETELY BEHIND THE HOUSE BUT THEY HAVE PUT PROPER TAG ON IT. AND IT IS ON THE SIDE OF HOUSE WHICH THEY NEED TO MOVE IT BACK A LITTLE BIT.
BUT HE CAN DO THAT AND HE WILL BE IN COMPLIANCE.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO DEAL WITH THAT AT THIS POINT.
THIS PORCH THIS FRONT PORCH IS MINE ITEM IN QUESTION ABOUT THE PERMITTING. AND ALSO THIS SHED THAT'S IN BACK. THERE WAS NO PERMIT PULLED FOR THIS SHED TO BE PLACED IN THE BACK.
IT SEEMS TO BE THERE'S A PROBLEM IN OPERABLE VEHICLES BEING PLACED ON THIS PROPERTY ON A CONTINUUAL BASIS.
THE PREAGENDA INSPECTION THAT WAS NO VIOLATIONS THAT GO TODAY.
HERE'S ANOTHER VEHICLE BACK HERE WITH NO TAG ON IT.
IT'S NOT YOU KNOW IT'S ALREADY PASSED.
CAN'T REALLY SEE TOO GOOD. THE FENCE HAS BEEN STOPPED RIGHT HERE. SO THE FENCE THAT WAS FORWARD OF THIS THAT WAS IN VIOLATION IS OKAY.
HE'S NOT IN VIOLATION OF THE FENCE ANYMORE.
THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL NOTICE OF VISIT THAT I PUT ON THE FRONT DOOR ON JANUARY 27TH. THESE ARE JUST PICTURES OF THE VEHICLES WHICH ARE NOT IN VIOLATION ANYMORE.
HE'S TAKEN CARE OF THESE. ALL THESE ARE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. SECOND TIME I CAME BACK OUT AND CITED THEM THEY WERE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
REALLY THE QUESTION IS ABOUT THE PERMITTING.
>> OKAY. IF WE LOOK AT THE AGENDA 5.1 --
>> THE SECTION THAT WE ARE DEALING WITH 22-101.
ALL THE REST ARE IN COMPLIANCE OR CAN EASILY BE BROUGHT INTO
[00:20:02]
COMPLIANCE. THE ONLY VIOLATION RIGHT NOW IS22-101. >> THE FRONT PORCH AND THE REAR
SHED. >> IS THIS A MANUFACTURED SHED?
LET'S SEE IF I CAN BRING UP THESE OTHER PICTURES HERE.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. I CAN'T TELL BY THE NOTE.
IS THERE SUPPOSED TO BE THE PERMIT PULLED.
REQUIRED TO HAVE A FENCED PERMIT.
THEY DID TAKE THE FENCE DOWN. IF HE WAS TO ERECT ANOTHER FENCE HE WOULD HAVE TO PULL ANOTHER PERMIT.
>> THERE'S NO VIOLATION. >> MISS FORSTROM.
KIND OF HARD TO SEE. >> WE WILL MAXIMIZE IT.
YOU CAN SEE IN THE BOTTOM PICTURE.
THERE'S A LOT THAT WE'RE -- THAT WAS NOT THERE.
HE'S TORN DOWN THE STUFF IN THE BACK.
THE ONLY THING IN QUESTION HE REPAINTED THE SHED WITH A DIFFERENT COLOR. THIS MANUFACTURERED SHED THAT REQUIRES A PERMIT TO BE PLACED IN THE BACKYARD.
AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION WAS THE PORCH IN THE VERY FRONT.
>> IT'S STILL THE QUESTION IS 22-101.
HIS FORSTROM CAN PROBABLY TESTIFY TO THE FACT AT SOME POINT EARLY IN THE GOING THERE WAS A PERMIT APPLIED FOR.
WAY BACK WHEN AND IT WAS DENIED. AND FOR WHATEVER REASON HE I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH LATER HE WENT AHEAD AND DID THE WORK ANYWAY. BOTH THE FRONT PORCH AND MANUFACTURED SHED REQUIRED PERMITS AND THERE'S NO PERMIT
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE CITY?
YES. >> DOES THE SHED HAVE ELECTRICAL
JUST RUNNING EXTENSION CHORD. NOTHING PERMANENT.
>> DO YOU WANT TO STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
>> DAVID WALDO. 728 SOUTH SIXTH STREET.
THE QUESTION ABOUT THE ELECTRICITY TO THE SHED.
THAT IS UNDER EXTENSION CHORD ONLY SITUATION.
NOTHING PERMANENT. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WOULD LIKE
TO ADD TO MR. WELLS? >> THERE'S NO OBJECTION WHATSOEVER. CHIP AND MICHELLE HAVE DONE MORE THAN -- GAVE ME ENOUGH TIME TO TAKE CARE OF THIS SITUATION AND EVERYTHING. THERE'S NO OBJECTION.
JUST UNDER RECENT CIRCUMSTANCES, I WAS ASKING JUST FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO GET THIS SITUATION UNDER CONTROL.
AS YOU SEE I'VE MADE PROGRESS. BUT IT'S JUST NOT AS FAST AS I WOULD LIKE. MR. WELLS WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO GET THIS SITUATION QUOTE, UNQUOTE, UNDER CONTROL?
>> WELL, I MEAN, HE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE APPLICATION FOR PERMIT THROUGH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. AND THEY PROBABLY WOULD REQUIRE
[00:25:04]
HIM TO DO ENGINEERING STUDY FOR AN ENGINEERING REPORT ON THE FRONT PORCH. AS LONG AS THE SHED IF HE HAS THE MANUFACTURING INFORMATION HE COULD GET THE PERMIT FOR THE SHED EASY. BUT THE FRONT PORCH IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE MORE DIFFICULT. THAT'S SOMETHING HE WOULD HAVE TO GET WITH THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND WHATEVER HE WOULD REQUIRE FROM YOU TO BE ABLE TO MAKE APPLICATION FOR MORE MYTH FOR THAT. THAT'S WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED.>> DOES THE CITY HAVE A RECOMMENDATION IN THIS CASE?
>> WE RECOMMEND THAT WE FIND HIM IN VIOLATION 20-101.
AND WE GIVE RESPONDENT 30 DAYS TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH PULLING THE PERMIT. AND WE RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY MAKE A MOTION THAT THE RESPONDENT PAY ADMIN A FINE OF $50 TO BEGIN ON FEBRUARY 8TH IF NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH PULLING THE PERMIT ALONG WITH FILING A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY MARCH 23RD,
2021. >> THE ONLY ACTION CITY REQUESTING AT THIS TIME IS APPLICATION AND PULLING OF
ANY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR EITHER THE
CITY OR MR. WALDO? >> I HAVE A QUESTION.
HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO GET A PERMIT.
AND IS HE STILL BEING FINED WHILE HE'S GETTING THE PERMIT?
>> THE BOARD HAS NOT DETERMINED ANY FINES AT THIS POINT.
>> HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE? >> WELL IT'S ALL GOING TO BE DEPENDANT ON WHAT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL REQUIRES HIM TO PROVIDE. IF THEY REQUIRE HIM O DO ENGINEERING REPORT FOR THAT FRONT PORCH, THEN YOU KNOW THAN HE WOULD HAVE ACQUIRE AN ENGINEER, AND THEN WHATEVER THE TIME THAT WOULD TAKE FOR HIM TO DO HIS DUE DILIGENCE AND PROVIDE ENGINEERING REPORT. I MEAN I DON'T KNOW THEIR AVAILABILITY AND HOW BUSY THAT ARE.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WILL HAPPEN OVERNIGHT FOR SURE.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. WALDO.
IS THERE A REASON YOU HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO GET A PERMIT YET?
I WAS LAID OFF DECEMBER 7 LITTLE AND THAT SORT OF SNOWBALLED EVERYTHING. I HAVE LOOKED FOR COUPLE OF LOCAL GENERAL CONTRACTORS TO TAKE CARE OF IT AND FINALLY WAS REFERRED TO COMPANY IN JACKSONVILLE AND I HAVE SET UP AN APPOINTMENT TO HAVE THE GUY COME OUT NEXT WEEK.
TO CHECK IT OUT. BUT, AGAIN IT'S JUST FOR HIM TO COME OUT IT'S $450. IT'S JUST KIND OF TIGHT RIGHT
NOW. >> IT SOUNDS LIKE WITH THESE TWO SEPARATE ISSUES, AS YOU REQUEST PERMITS IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO REQUEST SEPARATE PERMITS TO ADDRESS ISSUE.
>> WITH THIS SHED, JUST I WAS -- ACTUALLY THINKING ABOUT PUTTING IT UP FOR SALE. I HAD A COUPLE OF RELATIVE THAT WOULD TAKE IT OFF THE PROPERTY. THAT'S WHY I DELAYED ON GETTING
THE PERMIT FOR THAT ONE >> HE ALSO HAS THE OPTION IF HE COULD RETURN PORCH TO ORIGINAL STATE.
OF COURSE THERE MAY BE -- OF COURSE NO PERMIT INVOLVED INITIALLY. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WORLD REQUIRE A DEMOLITION PERSON MYTH TO TAKE THAT STUFF OUT.
IT MAY BE SOMETHING WE WOULD HAVE TO ADDRESS WITH HIM EVEN
WITH THAT. >> LET ME ASK YOU THIS QUESTION.
AS RECIPIENT OF CITY SERVICES, IF HE APPLIES FOR A PERMIT, LIKELIHOOD IS AT LEAST MORE THAN FOUR WEEKS BEFORE THERE'S
RESPONSE; IS THAT RIGHT? >> THAT COULD BE.
AND MAYBE IN SOME CASES 6 AND A HALF.
>> COULD BE. SO GOING -- SO THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION IS MORE THAN JUST SIMPLY APPLYING FOR A PERMIT.
IT'S GETTING ONE; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> HE'S GOING TO HAVE OBTAIN A PERMIT.
>> BUT THE TIME LINE THAT YOU SUGGESTED IS PROBABLY NOT REAL.
>> WELL -- >> AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED I'M ONLY ALLOWED TO GIVE 30 DAYS AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.
[00:30:02]
BUT YOU AND I WOULD AGREE THAT IT WOULD NOT BE UNREALISTIC FORIT THAT TAKE MORE THAN 30 DAYS. >> YES, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.
MR. WALDO CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION.
I WOULD TAKE YOU TAKE STEP AND DOCUMENT THIS.
SHOWS THE STEPS YOU'VE TAKEN. IT'S NOT IN WRITING.
IT DOESN'T EXIST. I THE PERMITTING PROCESS IS BACKLOGGED. I WILL TAKE LONGER.
IT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO MOVE ON QUICKLY JUST FOR YOUR BENEFIT.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE -- >> DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY OR THE RESPONDENT?
NOBODY AT HOME. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.
IF YOU ARE READY FOR A MOTION. >> LET ME CLOSE THE HEARING FIRST. I'M NOT SEEING YOU ON THE SCREEN FOR WHATEVER REASON. BUT MR. BOYD, BUT I HEAR YOU.
>> MOTION CLOSED. BOARD LIKE TO DISCUSS.
IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.
>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION CASE 2020-0315.
SECTION 42-174. SECTION 18--855.
FIND RESPONDENT IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.
>> THE CITY HAS ALREADY INDICATED THAT OTHER THAN 22-101 THAT THE PROPERTY BASICALLY IN COMPLIANCE.
THE ONLY VIOLATION WE'RE DEALING WITH THE 22-101 WHICH IS THE BASICALLY THE FRONT PORCH AND MAY OR MAY NOT INCLUDE THE SET DEPENDING ON WHETHER IT'S THERE IN 30 DAYS.
>> I AMEND MY MOTION TO SECTION 22-101.
>> AND THERE'S A SECOND. THE MOTION SIMPLY TO FIND VIOLATION OF 22-101. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION FROM THE
BOARD MEMBERS? >> I WILL PROCEED TO A VOTE.
>> WE HAVEN'T FIGURED OUT WHAT THE PENALTY OR WHAT THE PROCEDURE IS GOING TO BE. THAT'S WHAT WE WILL DO NEXT.
DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ABOUT THIS?
>> I HAVE A THOUGHT. I CAN'T SAY YOU GUYS.
I CAN ONLY SEE THE PHOTOGRAPH. I MISSED SOMETHING.
THERE WAS A DELAY FROM 2017 UNTIL 2020 BEFORE THERE WAS
PROGRESS. >> I THINK THAT PREDATES
MR. WELLS TIME TOO. >> LET ME HAVE MISS FORSTROM
STEP TO THE PODIUM. >> LET ME CLARIFY.
I DON'T NECESSARILY MEAN WHY THERE ISN'T CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY, BUT YOU CAN ADDRESS THAT.
BUT WHY THE VIOLATION WEREN'T BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE OVER
THAT PERIOD OF TIME. >> I KNOW FOR ME WHEN I WENT TO THIS PROPERTY, AND I PUT A NOTICE OF -- NOTICE OF VISIT THERE FOR THE VIOLATIONS, AND THEY WERE NOT CORRECTED AND AT THE POINT WHERE I NEEDED TO SEND OUT A NOTICE OF VIOLATION WE DECIDED THAT, THAT POINT THAT WE WOULD WRAP UP EVERYTHING THAT WAS ON THIS PROPERTY WHICH INCLUDE PREVIOUS PERMIT VIOLATION. THAT'S WHERE WE MADE A DECISION TO BRING THE OLD STUFF ALONG WITH IT.
AND I'LL HAVE MISS FORSTROM TESTIFY AS FAR AS THE OTHER
THINGS. >> MISS FORSTROM DO YOU WANT TO
STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. >> THIS CASE IS REALLY BEEN
[00:35:06]
GOING ON FOR YEARS. WHEN IT STARTED PROBABLY BACK IN 2011 AND 2012. WE HAD THIS WAS SEVERAL BUILDING OFFICIALS AGO. AND I HAVE TRIED OVER THE YEARS TO TRY TO GET BUILDING OFFICIALS INVOLVED IN THIS CASE.FINALLY MR. PEREZ DID GET INVOLVED.
HE AGREED. AND THAT'S WHEN THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN MR. WALDO AND MR. PEREZ --
>> THAT WAS ABOUT WHEN? >> THAT WAS ABOUT 2017 --
ONCE IN THE BUILDING OFFICIALS HANDS, WE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT. A LOT OF BUILDING OFFICIALS HAVE COME AND GONE IN THAT TIME. I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT HAD BEEN TAKEN CARE OF. BECAUSE NO ONE CAME BACK TO US.
COME TO FIND OUT THROUGH A PHONE CALL THAT MR. WALDO MADE WITH
ME, THAT DIDN'T GET DONE. >> HE CAN ANSWER THAT.
I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER. >> HE INITIATED A CALL TO YOU
ABOUT WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN? >> 2020.
BEGINNING OF 2020, I WOULD SAY. AUGUST 12TH, 2020.
THE REASON FOR THAT PHONE CALL WAS A NEIGHBOR OF HIS HAD RECENTLY FOUND OUT THERE WAS A LIEN AGAINST HER PROPERTY.
AND WHICH HAD COME BEFORE YOU. HE WAS A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED.
HE DIDN'T WANT TO SAME THING TO HAPPEN TO HIM.
WE REHASHED. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT HADN'T BEEN TAKEN CARE OF. THAT'S HOW WE HAVE COME TO THIS
POINT. >> HE'S THE ONE WHO INITIATED THE THING. THAT'S WHY WE ARE HERE.
>> YES, YES. THERE WERE OTHER VIOLATIONS BUT NOT THIS ONE. BECAUSE I WAS UNAWARE THIS WAS
NOT TAKEN CARE OF. >> AND THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CITY TO VIOLATION 22-101 AND THE REQUEST TO GET A PERMIT.
>> TO GET A PERMIT OR DEMOLITION.
>> YES. AND I UNDERSTAND HE CAN TESTIFY MORE CLEARLY THAT THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH THE DEMOLITION TO BRING IT BACK TO THE POINT OF ORIGIN.
OF IT BEING A FRONT PORCH. I WILL LET HIM TESTIFY TO THAT.
>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION. MY UNDERSTANDING THIS PERMITTING ISSUE. BUT WE ARE NOT CONCERNED ABOUT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OR PUBLIC NUISANCE OR DANGER TO ANYONE IN THIS CASE. WE DON'T KNOW.
BECAUSE PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS HAVEN'T BEEN DONE.
>> BUT NOT ANYTHING BEYOND PHYSICAL PROPERTY.
IT'S ALL ON THE PROPERTY. >> IT'S ALL ON THE PROPERTY, YES. BUT UNTIL THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE FOR PERMITTING. IT'S TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS BUILT TO CODE. THE INSPECTION ARE MADE SO IT'S SAFE STRUCTURE SO I CAN'T ATTEST TO THIS.
>> I MEAN, SOMEWHAT. I DON'T KNOW WHY NOTHING HAPPENED FROM 2019 WHEN THE BUILDING OFFICIAL SAID ENGINEER REPORT STUDY AND THE AUGUST 2020 PHONE CALL.
I DON'T -- WHY NOTHING HAPPENED ON THE PROPERTY.
>> I UNDERSTAND NOW WHY MICHELLE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING DURING THAT TIME. BUT I'M ASKING THE OWNER.
>> HE'S COMING TO THE MIC. >> JUST GO AHEAD.
>> WITH THE EXACTLY WHAT'S THE QUESTION?
>> THE QUESTION IS, THERE WAS REFERRAL TO BUILDING OFFICIAL SOMETIME IN 2017. NOTHING HAPPENED UNTIL YOU MADE THE PHONE CALL TO MISS FORSTROM IN 2020.
AND THE QUESTION IN SUM AND SUBSTANCE.
>> SIMPLY PROCRASTINATING WITH THE CHANGE OF THE OFFICIALS, THE BUILDINGS OFFICIAL I WAS JUST SORT OF OUT OF SIGHT.
OUT OF MIND. I WOULD GO ABOUT LIVING MY LIFE.
RESPONSIBILITY KICKED IN. I DECIDED TO REACH OUT TO MICHELLE AND SINCE THEN I'VE BEEN TRYING TO MAKE THE SITUATION BETTER. AND PLAN TO DO SO.
JUST NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME.
[00:40:06]
>> THANK YOU. >> ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
FROM MEMBERS OF THE BOARD? >> ONE THING THAT CONCERNED ME IS THAT THERE'S ELECTRICAL INVOLVED.
TO ME THAT'S A NONSTARTER. IT'S A NONSTARTER HOW?
>> THIS THE SERIOUS OFFENSE. BECAUSE YOU COULD HAVE ALL KINDS OF SITUATIONS ARRIVING FROM FAULTY WIRING.
THIS NOT A TREE LIMB OR GRASS OVERGROWN.
THIS THE POTENTIAL HAZARD. REAL HAZARD.
>> CURRENTLY YOU RUN EXTENSION CHORD FROM THE HOUSE TO SHED
WHEN DOING THINGS IN THE SHED. >> YES.
>> AND SO WHEN YOU'RE NOT DOING THINGS IN THE SHED, THE EXTENSION CHORD GET ROLLED BACK UP.
>> YES. >> I THINK HE'S REFERRING TO THE FRONT PORCH CAN. THE FRONT PORCH SIMPLY EXTENSION OF WIRES. FROM OUTDOOR LIGHT JUST MOVED IT TO ANOTHER LOCATION. I STAND CORRECTED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE BOARD?
>> WE HAVE FOUND THE OWNER IN VIOLATION THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT.
WHAT'S THE WILL OF THE BOARD? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION.
>> 2020, 0315. I MOVE THAT WE GIVE THE RESPONDENT 30 DAYS TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE OR PAY $50 A DAY UNTIL IT'S BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE.
>> RECOGNIZING THAT, THAT'S AN IMPOSSIBILITY.
>> I'M JUST SAYING REALISTICALLY THREE YEARS OR NOT, SUGGESTING THAT HE BRING INTO COMPLIANCE IS IMPOSSIBILITY ADMINISTRATIVELY IN THE CITY OF FERNANDINA. HE'S NOT GOING TO GET PERMIT IN 30 DAY AND COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION.
>> BARE IT DOWN AND GET A PERMIT AND BUILD IT BACK.
>> THERE'S A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND?
NO SECOND. ZOOM CONFERENCE CALL.
WOULD SOMEONE ELSE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION?
>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION. >> OKAY.
>> THAT WE CONTINUE MAKE IT 60 DAYS TO GET THE PERMIT AND
COMPLETE THE WORK. >> AND THEN IN 60 DAYS, FROM TODAY TO GET THE PERMIT AND COMPLETE THE WORK AND IF IT IS NOT COMPLETED $50 A DAY AS THE FINE?
>> ADMINISTRATIVE FEES. >> AND ADMINISTRATIVE FEES.
GIVEN THE BOARD, IT WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE NINETY DAYS.
I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH 90 DAYS.
LET'S SET SHORTER DEADLINE TO APPLY FOR THE PERMIT.
>> WHY WON'T THAT WORK? >> IF YOU SAY ONE WAY TO DO THAT WOULD BE TO REQUIREMENT TO MAKE APPLICATION FOR PERMIT WITHIN 14 DAYS AND THEN COMPLETE THE WORK WITH X PERIOD OF TIME AFTER
[00:45:03]
OBTAINING THE PERMIT. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?>> I'M MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.
I DON'T KNOW THE AMOUNT OF TIME TO COMPLETE AFTER OBTAINING THE PERMIT. MORE OF THE BUILDING PEOPLE TO ADDRESS THAT. I'M MORE COMFORTABLE THAN JUST PUSHING BACK AND PUSHING IT BACK.
THE MOTION IS 14 DAYS TO APPLY FOR THE PERMIT.
AND TO COMPLETE THE WORK WITHIN RIGHT NOW UNSPECIFIED PERIOD OF TIME AFTER RECEIPT OF THE PERMIT.
>> MR. WELLS AFTER RECEIPT OF THE PERMIT, YOU THINK THE PROJECT CAN BE COMPLETED IN 30 DAYS?
>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, IF THE MANUFACTURED SHED IS GONE, THAT'S ONE THING. YOU COMPLETE RESTRUCTURING OF
THE PORCH IN 30 DAYS. >> MR. WALDO, WILL YOU WITH
DOING THE WORK YOURSELF? >> IF IT COMES DOWN TO IT, I WAS GOING TO GO AND JUST REMOVE EVERYTHING I'VE DONE.
WHICH IS PRETTY MUCH JUST THE WINDOWS AND THAT DOOR.
THAT CAN BE DONE WITHIN THE A DAY.
>> APPLICATION FOR PERSON MYTH WITHIN 14 DAYS.
COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT AFTER RECEIPT OF THE PERMIT.
IN 30 DAYS. >> ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH
>> WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION.
>> SO MOVED. >> IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND. >> DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WE
>> 14 DAYS TO APPLY FOR THE PERMIT.
COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT WITHIN 30 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THE
WHO MADE THE SECOND? >> AND THEN IF IT'S NOT IN COMPLIANCE, $50 A DAY THEREAFTER.
AND ONE WAY OR THE OTHER PAYMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE FEES.
>> MR. THOMPSON SECONDED. >> MR. CHAIR, IS THAT PERMIT
INCLUDES THE SHED ALSO? >> YES.
>> IT'S FOR ANY ALL 2020-0315. IT'S IN COMPLIANCE OR NOT.
IF IT'S NOT THERE IT AIN'T THERE NO MORE.
AS THEY SAY BACK IN THE BRONX. >> IS THAT WHAT THEY SAY?
>> IT'S RIGHT AFTER WE SAY SHUT YOUR MOUTH.
OR BLESS YOUR HEART. ONE OR THE OTHER.
READY TO CALL THE ROLL? >> LETTER FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD THAT WILL OUTLINE ALL OF
THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. WALDO.
[5.2 WILLIE & PAULA EVANS, 810 S. 11TH STREET, CASE 2020-0423.]
NEXT CASE 5.2 WILL JILL AND PAULA EVANS, 810 SOUTH 11TH STREET CASE 2020-0423. VIOLATIONS OF THE CITY OF CODE SECTION 442-1112346 MAINTAIN PROPERTY 42-119.PARKING PROHIBITED OVERNIGHT. LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 7.01.05D PARKING. IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WILL
SPEAK TO THAT CASE? >> MR. WELLS?
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT ALL OF OUR EVIDENCE AND PICTURES AND DOCUMENTS INTO THE
RECORD. >> WITHOUT OBJECTION ACCEPTED.
[00:50:19]
>> I THINK I CAN DO IT. I THINK I CAN.
>> THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE PROPERTY THIS MORNING.
YOU CAN SEE THE PROPERTY STILL IN VIOLATION OF 42-119 AND 7.01.05D. THE OTHER VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN CORRECTED. THAT'S THE TRAILER PARK IN THE FRONT YARD. THIS THE ORIGINAL NOTICE OF VISIT. THIS THE WHERE THE TRAILER WAS PARKED IN RIGHT-OF-WAY. THAT TRAILER HAS BEEN REMOVED.
HERE'S A PICTURE OF THAT. HERE'S A PICTURE OF MORE JUNK.
MORE JUNK. >> DOES SOMEONE LIVE THERE,
THIS CASE HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO YOU BEFORE.
NOT ON THE SAME VIOLATION. THIS WILL BE A REPEAT VIOLATOR AFTER THIS CASE TONIGHT. BECAUSE WE HAVE YOU HAVE FOUND THEM IN VIOLATION OF OTHER ISSUES AND THIS WILL KIND OF LIKE ROUND IT OUT. AFTER TONIGHT, WHEN YOU FIND IF IN VIOLATION OF THESE PARTICULAR CODES, HE WILL IN THE FUTURE HE
WILL BE REPEAT VIOLATOR. >> OCTOBER 13TH, 2020, WE RECEIVED A COMPLAINT ABOUT THIS PROPERTY BEING OVERGROWN WITH JUNK AND DEBRIS LYING ALL OVER THE PROPERTY.
I PERFORMED AN INSPECTION AND CONFIRMED THE YARD NEEDED TO BE CUT AND CLEANED. I ALSO OBSERVED EXCESSIVE AMOUNT OF JUNK AND DEBRIS THAT NEEDED TO BE CLEANED UP.
AND REMOVED FROM THE PROPERTY. I OBSERVED A UTILITY TRAILER PARK IN THE FRONT DRIVEWAY WITH JUNK AND DEBRIS ON IT.
THERE WAS ANOTHER UTILITY TRAILER PARK ON THE CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY STILL JUNK AND DEBRIS THAT NEEDED TO BE CLEANED OF JUNK AND DEBRIS. I POSTED A NOTICE OF VISIT ON THE FRONT DOOR GIVING THE OWNER TEN DAYS TO CORRECTION THE VIOLATIONS. I REPORTED PHOTOGRAPH OF THE VIOLATION AND THE POSTING. OCTOBER 26TH, A SECOND INSPECTION WAS PERFORMED. OWNER HAD NOT CORRECTED ANY OF THE VIOLATIONS. NOVEMBER 18TH FOLLOW UP INSPECTIONS PERFORMED. I TRIED TO CONTACT THE OWNER AT THE RESIDENT. THE OWNERS NOT AT HOME.
ALL VIOLATIONS WERE STILL ONGOING.
NOVEMBER 19TH. CERTIFIED LETTER WAS SENT TO THE OWNER. GIVING ADDITIONAL TEN DAYS TO CORRECT THE VIOLATIONS WITH A TIME AND DATE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CAB BOARD. THE VIOLATIONS HAD NOT BEEN BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE. NOVEMBER 25TH WE RECEIVED RETURN RECEIPT FROM THE POST OFFICE. WITH THE OWNER SIGNATURE ON IT GIVING US PROPER SERVICE. DECEMBER 2ND.
I PERFORMED NOTICE OF VIOLATION INSPECTION WHICH CONFIRM THE PROPERTY WAS STILL IN VIOLATION. DECEMBER 15TH ATTEMPTED TO CONTACT THE OWNER BY PHONE. ALL THE CALL I TRIED TO MAKE THE OWNER. VOICE MAIL IS ALWAYS FULL.
I CAN'T LEAVE MESSAGES ON HIS PHONE.
DECEMBER 21ST, DID PREAGENDA INSPECTION CONFIRMING THE JUNK AND DEBRIS HAD BEEN REMOVED. NOWHERE NEAR IN COMPLIANCE.
TRAILER PARK ON THE FRONT CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY HAS BEEN REMOVED.
AND UTILITY TRAILER STILL PARKED IN THE FRONT DRIVEWAY WITH JUNK AND DEBRIS ON IT. AND THERE'S STILL LIKE I SAID JUST AS YOU SEE THERE'S JUNK AND DEBRIS LAYING ON THE GROUND THAT NEED TO BE CLEANED UP AND REMOVED.
THE YARD CUT AND BUSHES TRIMMED BACK TO MINIMUM STANDARDS.
WE HAD NUMEROUS PROBLEM WITH THIS OWNER CONCERNING THE PROPERTY AND OTHER VIOLATIONS OVER THE YEAR.
IT SEEMS HE'S NOT CONCERNED ABOUT BEING HELD IN VIOLATION AND FINE BECAUSE HE'S CURRENTLY BEING FINED DAILY FOR OTHER
[00:55:02]
VIOLATIONS. THE CITY RECOMMENDS THAT WE MAKE A MOTION FIND THE PROPERTY IN VIOLATION 42-119 AND 7.01.05D SPECIFIC PARKING RESTRICTION FOR BOATS AND TRAILER GIVING THE RESPONDENT TEN DAYS TO COME COCOMPLIANCE.ALLED A MINUTE FEES BE PAID BY RESPOND AND AND FINE OF $50 A DAY PER VIOLATION TO BEGIN ON JANUARY 18TH IF NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH FILING A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY MARCH 5TH, 2021.
AND THE CITY RESTS. >> ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE
QUESTION FOR MR. WELLS? >> I DON'T HAVE A BUTTON TO PUSH. CHIP, DID THEY WHATEVER THEY MOVED TRAILER WISE, DID THEY BRING INTO COMPLIANCE 78-844.
>> YES, THAT'S THE TRAILER IN RIGHT-OF-WAY.
42-116, YOU ARE OKAY WITH THAT. WHAT THEY DID WITH THE YARD.
THEY DID CUT THE GRASS. >> AND THEY CUT BACK THE BUSHES.
>> AND THAT BRINGS THAT PART INTO COMPLIANCE.
>> YES, MA'AM. >> SO YOU JUST LOOK AT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 7.01.05 FOR THE TRAILER IN THE FRONT DRIVEWAY AND THEN 42.119 FOR ALL THE GARBAGE AND JUNK.
>> THAT'S CORRECT IN THE YARD. >> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> IS THERE A MOTION ACCEPT THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION?
>> I WILL MAKE THAT MOTION. >> IS THERE A SECOND?
>> I WILL SECOND. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. MR. WELLS, IF I UNDERSTOOD YOU CORRECTLY YOU SAID THE PROPERTY IS PRESENTLY BEING FINED.
ARE YOU LIMITED TO DISCLOSE WHAT IS NATURE OF BEING
>> I BELIEVE IT'S FOR INOPERABLE VEHICLES ON THE PROPERTY.
WE CITED HIM PREVIOUSLY FOR INOPERABLE VEHICLES AND ALSO I THINK THERE WAS TRAILERS PREVIOUSLY, BUT I THINK TRAILER PART OF IT CAME INTO COMPLIANCE. BUT HE NEVER COMPLIED WITH THE INOPERABLE VEHICLE PART. WE FOUND HIM IN VIOLATION OF THAT. THAT'S WHAT HE'S CURRENTLY BEING
THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE TABLE.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CALL THE ROLL.
[5.3 MARY DONN BOWMAN, 1622 HIGHLAND STREET, CASE 2020-0445]
>> CASE NUMBER 5.3 MARY DONN BOWMAN.
1622 HIGHLAND STREET CASE NUMBER 2020-0445 VIOLATION OF THE CITY FERNANDINA BEACH CODE ORDINANCES.
42-116 DUTY TO MAINTAIN PROPERTY.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WILL TESTIFY IN THAT CASE?
>> MR. WELLS IF. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT ALL OF OUR EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD.
[01:00:30]
THIS IS A CASE OVER AT 1622 HIGHLANDS STREET.WE RECEIVED COMPLAINT ABOUT THE BACKYARD.
ACTUALLY ORIGINATED FROM A CASE THAT STARTED NEXT DOOR.
THEY HAD A LOT OF JUNK AND DEBRIS NEXT DOOR.
I WAS DOING AN INSPECTION. THESE ARE PICTURE -- THIS PICTURE DOESN'T SHOW THE REAL EXTENT OF IT.
BUT THIS IS THERE BACKYARD. THESE ARE PICTURES TAKEN TODAY.
THESE ARE PICTURES TAKEN WHEN THE ORIGINAL VIOLATION WAS FIRST -- AS YOU CAN SEE IT'S OVERGROWN.
>> ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE OCTOBER 22ND, LIKE I SAID WE RECEIVED A COMPLAINT ABOUT THIS PROPERTY BEING OVERGROWN.
I PERFORMED AN INSPECTION AND CONFIRMED THE BACKYARD WAS CONSIDERABLY OVERGROWN. I POSTED A NOTICE OF VISIT ON THE FRONT DOOR GIVING THE OWNER TEN DAYS TO CORRECT THE VIOLATION. I RECORDED PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE POSTING OF THE NOTICE OF VISIT ON THE FRONT DOOR ALONG WITH THE VIOLATIONS. NOVEMBER 22ND, A SECOND INSPECTION WAS PERFORMED. THE PROPERTY IN VIOLATION OF 42-116. NOVEMBER 5TH CERTIFIED LETTER SENT OUT GIVING THE OWNER ADDITIONAL TEN DAYS.
TIME TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD.
NOVEMBER 10TH, WE RECEIVED THE RETURN RECEIPT CARD BACK FROM THE POSTS OF GIVING US PROPER SERVICE WITH THE OWNER'S SIGNATURE ON IT. NOVEMBER 16TH, I PERFORMED A NOTICE OF VIOLATION INSPECTION. THE PROPERTY WAS STILL IN VIOLATION. DEC DECEMBER 15TH I MAD CONTACT WITH THE OWNER ABOUT THE PROPERTY.
SHE STATED SHE'S GOING OUT OF TOWN.
SHE WAS GOING TO CONTACT HER YARD PERSON WHO WAS GOING TO CUT AND CLEAR THE BACKYARD. DECEMBER 21ST DID PREAGENDA INSPECTION AND THE PROPERTY WAS IN VIOLATION.
CONCLUSION I BRING THIS CASE BEFORE CODE BOARD BECAUSE THE OWNER NOT GIVING MY GREAT CONFIDENCE SHE WILL BRING THIS PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE WITHOUT FURTHER COMPLIANCE.
I TRIED TO MAKE CONTACT HER BUT UNABLE TO REACH THE RESPOND AND?
>> IS THIS A FULL-TIME RESIDENT? >> YES, SIR.
>> THE CITY RECOMMEND A MOTION BY MADE FINE THE PROPERTY IF VIOLATION OF 42-116. DUTY TO MAINTAIN PROPERTY GIVING THE PRERESPOND TEN DAYS TO COME INTO COMPLIANT BY JANUARY 17TH.
2021. THE CITY RECOMMEND A MOTION TO BE MADE THAT ALL ADMIN FEE BE PAID BY RESPOND AND.
FINE OF $25 TO BEGIN ON JANUARY 18TH, 2021 IF NOT IN COMPLIANCE ALONG WITH FILING LIEN ON THE PROPERTY OF MARCH 5TH, 2021.
>>> THE CITY RESTS. >> ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE
QUESTIONS FOR MR. WELLS? >> I DO.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> I'M JUST CURIOUS.
IS THIS THE BACKYARD IS THIS FRONT YARD TAKEN CARE OF?
>> YES, MA'AM. THE FRONT YARD IS TAKEN CARE OF.
>> SHE TOLD YOU SHE HAD A YARD PERSON WHEN YOU SPOKE TO HER ON THE PHONE. DOES THAT MEAN THE YARD PERSON
ONLY DOING THE FRONT YARD? >> APPARENTLY.
I WOULD ASSUME THAT. THERE'S NOTHING BEING CUT IN THE
BACKYARD. >> I WILL MAKE NOTE WE HAD PRIOR CODE CASES AT THIS HOUSE WHICH HAS NO BEARING ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE. BUT WE'VE HAD ISSUES WITH THE OWNER NOT COMING INTO COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER CODE VIOLATIONS.
>> YES, MA'AM. >> THANK YOU FOR THIS INFORMATION. WOULD IT BE UNREASONABLE TO ASK THE CITY ASSUMING THAT WE ACCEPT YOUR RECOMMENDATION IN THE OFF CHANCE THAT THIS HOMEOWNER STILL OUT OF TOWN WITH THE CODE
[01:05:02]
ENFORCEMENT OFFICE BE WILLING TO MAKE ATTEMPT TO GET HER BYPHONE. >> WE DEFINITELY CAN CONTINUE TO TRY TO MAKE CONTACT WITH THE OWNER.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF MR. WELLS?
>> QUESTION? I MISSED WHEN YOU WERE SPEAKING.
WHAT WAS THE FIRST DATE OF CONTACT THAT WAS MADE WITH THE
PROPERTY OWNER? >> FIRST CONTACT THAT I MADE WITH HER ON THE PHONES DECEMBER 15TH.
>> ANYBODY ON THE BOARD WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE
CITY'S RECOMMENDATION? >> I WILL MAKE THAT MOTION.
>> MOTION TO ACCEPT THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION.
>> MISS CROW. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
[6. BOARD BUSINESS]
>> UNDER BOARD BUSINESS, WE'VE ADDED AN ITEM THAT CAME UP AGAIN AT OUR LAST MEETING ON DECEMBER 3RD.
IT'S AN ITEM WE DISCUSS FROM TIME TO TIME SINCE I'VE BEEN ON IT. MICHELLE WORKED TO GET SOME RESOURCES FOR PEOPLE WHO LEGITIMACY NEED ASSISTANCE TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE. WE STARTED THAT DISCUSSION LAST MONTH. WE SUGGESTED GET THE FERNANDINA BEACH FOOTBALL TEAM OUT. THEY CAN GET COMMUNITY SERVICE.
I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN TAKE STOCK WITH CHILDRENS.
ROBIN LENZ AND I HAD DISCUSSION ABOUT GETTING OUR KIDS TO DO THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. AND OTHER PEOPLE HAVE TALKED TO OTHER AGENCY AND COMMUNITY GROUPS.
IT'S OPEN FOR DISCUSSION. NICOLE, DO YOU WANT TO
WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION. WE'VE GOT ONGOING CASE NOW.
MICHELLE I APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS YOU HAVE DONE FOR THE DOCUMENTATION OF FOLLOW UP WITH THE VARIOUS RESPONDENTS HERE.
BUT, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, I THINK AS A BOARD WE WOULD LIKE TO HELP BOTH THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICE AND THE CITY COME INTO COMPLIANCE. AND THAT FUNDAMENTALLY IS OUR GOAL. COMPLIANCE.
AND SO HOW CAN WE AS A BOARD HELP YOU.
I UNDERSTAND THAT ARE NEED FOR LICENSED CONTRACTOR FOR CERTAIN CASES. I HAVE SOME PRELIMINARILY THAT I'M LOOKING AT THERE. I KNOW YOU HAVE PREPARED RESOURCES SO YOU KNOW HAPPY TO WORK WITH THE CITY TO UPDATE THE RESOURCES AS NEEDED OR PROVIDE OTHER RESOURES THAT MIGHT BE AVAILABLE. I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF THE CITY WORKERS HAVE RECOMMENDATION FOR WAYS IN BY THE BOARD CAN HELP OR HOW WE MIGHT IDENTIFY SPECIFIC CASES YOU KNOW.
I UNDERSTAND THAT CHIP IS KIND OF THE FRONT LINE ON A NUMBER OF THESE CASES. MAYBE IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY RATHER THAN GETTING CASES TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD TRYING TO RESOLVE THEM BEFORE HAND. I HAVE THE SENSE THAT THERE'S BOARD MEMBERS WHO WOULD BE OPEN TO PROVIDING SUPPORT IF WE CAN HELP THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICE AND OUR NEIGHBORS.
THEY COMPILED A LIST OF COMMUNITY RESOURCES.
FOR SOME CLIENTS THAT COULD BE A DAUNTING TASK.
THAT'S ONE SET OF QUESTIONS I HAVE IN TERMS OF EXPLAINING THAT. THEN THE OTHER ONE MY FORMER LIFE IN THE CITY HERE QUESTION IF WE RECRUIT PEOPLE TO DO WORK
[01:10:02]
ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, WHAT'S THE LIABILITY QUESTIONS FOR EXAMPLE, IF I DID RECRUIT THE HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL TEAM, WHO HAS LIABILITY INSURANCE FOR THAT?>> WEIGH IN. >> I WILL LET TAMMY ANSWER THE LIABILITY QUESTIONS. I THINK THAT GENERAL CLEANUP EVEN PROBABLY CUTTING A LAWN OF YARD.
THAT STUFF IS FAIRLY EASY AS I'VE TALKED TO MR. S WHEN YOU GET INTO ANYTHING STRUCTURAL NOW WE TALK ABOUT CONTRACTORS AND PERMITS AND SUCH. IF WE COULD FIND CONTRACTORS THAT HAVE THE TIME AND ARE WILLING AND WOULD DONATE THEIR TEAM WE STILL HAVE THE CHALLENGE OF WHO WILL PAY FOR THE MATERIALS FOR THAT. UNFORTUNATELY THIS THE GOING TO BE AN EXTREMELY TIGHT BUDGET YEAR.
I THINK EVERYONE UNDERSTAND THAT.
I DO HAVE COUPLE OF IDEAS THAT I WILL PRESENT TO THE COMMISSION.
SOME WAYS WON'T COST THE COMMISSION.
MAYBE WE PUT A FRACTION OF THAT MONEY INTO A FUND THAT MAYBE PEOPLE CAN QUALIFY FOR. EYE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR A WHILE. VACANT PROPERTY REGISTRATION.
THEY HEAR THIS FOR THE FIRST TIME.
TO START SOMETHING SO THAT WE MAY HAVE SOME MONEY TO FUND THE MATERIALS FOR SOME OF THESE PEOPLE THAT CANNOT AFFORD IT.
SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE SOME OTHER IDEAS TO BE ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THAT. I HAVE NOT.
I HAVE NO PRESENTED THAT YET. IT'S A WORK IN PROGRESS.
>> I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE NOTICED OVER TIME.
A LOT OF THIS IS MAINTENANCE OF LOTS.
THAT'S WHAT GET THE NEIGHBORS IRE UP.
THE WIRING INSIDE THE HOUSE AND ALL THOSE THINGS.
NEIGHBORS DON'T TEND TO NOTICE THAT.
THEY NOTICE THE BACKYARD. >> THEY NOTICE MAINTENANCE OF
PROPERTY, YES. >> A LOT OF THAT IS REALLY TIME
ON TASK AND MANUAL LABOR. >> UH-HUH.
>> HOW WILL HE GET PEOPLE TO DO THAT AND THE OTHER QUESTION IS NOT THAT WE WILL SOLVE THIS PROBLEM TONIGHT.
KIND OF A MEANS TEST. WHEN I SAID THAT WE NEED PEOPLE WHO ARE NEED OF ASSISTANCE. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
>> EXACTLY. >> WE HAVE THOSE KINDS OF LINES AND TAKE STOCK. THAT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
WHEN WE CAN. >> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE'S CERTAIN CHURCH GROUPS THAT MAY BE INTERESTED.
AND QUESTION QUESTION I ASK THE LIABILITY QUESTION.
AND >> IF THIS WAS A PROGRAM SANCTIONED BY THE CITY. THAT'S EASY.
WE HAVE VOLUNTEERS ALL THE TIME. REMOVING INVASIVE SPECIES.
THE BOARD ALLOWS AND SO DOES WORKER COMP IF THERE'S A VOLUNTEER WE HAVE HIM SIGN WAIVER AND RELEASE.
IF THEY GET HURT. THEY WON'T SUE THE CITY.
WORKER'S COMP CARRIER COVERED THEM LIKE PAID REGULAR EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY. THEY GET MEDICAL CARE.
AND CERTAIN BENEFITS FROM THAT. THEY ARE COVERED THERE.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT AS LONG AS VOLUNTEERS WE JUST HAVE TO HAVE A PROCESS FOR MAKING SURE THAT WE KNOW WHO THEY ARE. WE CAN'T JUST HAVE FOLK SHOWING UP ON AND WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PREVENT THE STRAGGLER HERE AND
[01:15:05]
THERE. JUST AS WE JUST CAN'T JUST SAY HEY EVERYBODY SHOW UP AT THIS TIME.LET'S DO THIS PROJECT. THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
BUT THE LIABILITY COULD BE AN ISSUE.
THEY MAY NOT BE COVERE BY WORKERS COMP.
WE COULDN'T VERIFY WHO THEY ARE. THEY CERTAINLY HAVEN'T SIGNED A WAIVER OR HOLD HARMLESS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABILITY
LIABILITY? >> JEIN MY MIND BECAUSE THERE'S SOME INITIAL INTEREST IN DIFFERENT COMMUNITY GROUPS AS WELL AS PLETHORA OF RESOURCES THAT MICHELLE HAS COMBINED, I'M WONDERING IF WE COULD POSSIBLY LOOK AT SOMETHING TOWARD THE END OF QUARTER ONE OF THIS YEAR WHERE INTERESTED BOARD MEMBERS OR OTHER MIGHT FACILITY SOME OUTREACH AND WE COULD FACILITY A DISCUSSION WITH INTERESTED PARTIES WHO MIGHT EITHER HAVE PHYSICAL SUPPORT OR FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS.
EXPLAIN THE LIABILITY ASPECTS, POTENTIALLY I'M WILLING TO FACILITY SOME PROJECT MANAGEMENT LOGISTICAL SUPPORT FOR THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING --
>> IF WE HAVE IN OUR HR DEPARTMENT.
WE NEED THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT -- I THINK THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT IN CONCERT WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT.
THERE'S VOLUNTEER APPLICATIONS ALREADY.
IF YOU HAVE INTERESTED VOLUNTEERS, THEY PROBABLY SHOULD CONTACT CODE ENFORCEMENT OR LEGAL.
I WILL LET KATIE IN MY OFFICE KNOW TOMORROW.
WE WILL SEND THEM TO RIGHT PEOPLE OR GET THEM THE VOLUNTEER APPLICATION. THEY FILL THAT OUT.
AND THAT'S EVERYTHING THEY NEED. THEY CAN FILL THAT OUT -- LET'S SAY THEY WILL BE COMMITTING TO DOING SOME OF THE PROJECTS.
THEY DON'T NEED TO FILL OUT APPLICATION EVERY SINGLE TIME.
THE APPLICATION ASKED WHAT THEY WILL DOING.
THEY COULD SAY I'M GOING TO HELP FOR THE NEXT YEAR OR WHATEVER CLEANING OUT WEEDS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
THAT'S FINE. IT'S AN EASY PROCESS.
WE DON'T COORDINATE ANYTHING. YOU ALL AS CITIZENS AND NONPROFITS AND CHURCHES WOULD THEN JUST GO DO THE WORK.
AND WE AT LEAST KNOW WHO THE PEOPLE ARE.
AND YOU KNOW >> I WOULD SEEM TO MAKE SENSE IF WE REDUCE A STRUCTURE TO WRITING.
SO THAT IT'S PASSED ON FROM ONE GENERATION TO NEXT.
WE HAVE TO PUT SOMETHING IN WRITING HOW OUR PROCEDURES WOULD GO FOR THIS. IT'S SORT OF A PROGRAM.
AND IT WOULD BE NICE FOR THE CITY AND THE TAX PAYER ARE PAYING FOR WORKER COMP INSURANCE THAT THE CITY GETS CREDIT THAT WAY BY HAVING IT BE LIKE SOME SORT OF PROGRAM YOU NEED.
MAYBE GET SOME PRESS AND WE'LL GET MORE INTEREST THAT WAY TOO.
>> GIVEN FLORIDA SUNSHINE LAW AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
IF WE CREATED A SUBCOMMITTEE OF TWO OR THREE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEMBERS TO MEET WITH MICHELLE AND SOMEONE FROM LEGAL DEPARTMENT, WE PROBABLY HAVE NOTICE THAT AS A MEETING.
>> YES. >> BUT WE COULD HOLD THAT
MEETING AT THE TECH CENTER. >> YEAH.
SURE. >> AND IF PEOPLE COME THAT'S WELL AND GOOD. IF THEY DON'T, WE CAN STILL
>> WOULD THIS FALL UNDER AT ALL A REASON TO RECUSE THEMSELVES IF THEY GET INVOLVED IN A CASE THAT ENDS UP STILL COMING BEFORE THE
BOARD? >> WE WILL TRY HEAD THIS OFF BEFORE IT COMES TO BOARD. BUT CIRCUMSTANCES SOMETIMES HAPPEN WHERE IT STILL COMES FOR WHATEVER REASON.
>> LET ME TRY TO GET AROUND THAT.
IT'S A LEGITIMATE QUESTION. BUT IF WE CREATE A SET OF PROCEDURES, AND THE CONTACT PERSON IS NOT A BOARD MEMBER.
>> RIGHT. >> IT'S TRINITY METHODS CHURCH.
IT'S WHOEVER THE DEAN IS AT TRINITY HIGH SCHOOL THIS WEEK.
AND WHATEVER TAKE STOCK IN CHILDREN.
THE INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNER WILL BE GOING THROUGH THOSE ORGANIZATIONS. WE ARE JUST PROVIDING A DIRECTION TO DO THAT. THEN WHATEVER HAPPENS --
>> AS COMMUNITY MEMBERS. THERE'S TWO REASONS THAT YOU WOULD ABSTAIN OR RECUSE YOURSELF.
ONE IS A TRUE ETHICAL VOTING CONFLICT UNDER THE STATE LAW.
THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A FINANCIAL INTEREST.
YOU DON'T HAVE A FINANCIAL INTEREST.
[01:20:01]
HOWEVER, AS QUASI-JUDICIAL BOARD MEMBER THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL LAYER OF BIAS THAT IF YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'VE JUST GOTTEN TOO INVOLVED, WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS THE PROPERTY, WHATEVER.YOU CAN'T BE UNBIASSED IN YOUR DECISION.
YOU WOULD ABSTAIN. >> IF WE SET UP EXISTING PROCEDURE WITH USER FRIENDLY DOCUMENT.
MANY OF THE FOLKS THAT WE DEAL WITH.
HAVE DIFFICULTY WITH INSTITUTION.
WE HAVE TO MAKE IT USER FRIENDLY DOCUMENT.
IF THAT DIRECTS TO GET HELP. THE BOARD IS FOR DISCUSSION.
>> THE ONE THING THOSE CASE THAT WE WANT THE DO HAVE ONE OF THE VOLUNTEER GROUP MAKE CONTACT WITH THE CITY ON THEIR BEHALF.
THAT'S EASY. >> SOMEONE WOULD BE ABLE TO LET THEM KNOW THE CITY IS THERE. WE HAVE THE PROCESS.
AND THE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GET INVOLVED.
AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO ACTUALLY COME ASKING THE CITY FOR HELP OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THAT'S A BIG THING TOO.
WE CAN HANDLE THAT. THAT'S EASY.
IF WE HAVE USER FRIENDLY LIST OF THINGS.
TEASE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT YOU CAN CONTACT, YOU CAN COMPLETE
THE CIRCLE. >> WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS ADD THAT -- I COULD DO A SUBSUCTION ON THAT LIST.
I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THE PROBABLE ENTITIES ON TO THAT LIST.
BECAUSE IT'S A VERY IT'S A BIG LIST.
AND I DON'T TYPICALLY SUGGEST ANY PARTICULAR THING.
BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE VERY PROUD. AND I LET THEM CHOOSE WHAT THEY ARE COMFORTABLE WITH. ARE YOU MORE COMFORTABLE WITH -- THERE'S SO MANY DIFFERENT ENTITIES.
I WOULD LIKE YOUR INPUT AND IF YOU WANT ME TO SEND YOU THAT LIST. I WILL DO THAT.
THE MORE ENTITIES ON THIS LIST THE BETTER.
IF WE NEED TO REMOVE THEM IT WOULD BE HAPPY TO DO THAT.
THIS IS ALL TO HELP THESE PEOPLE.
>> I KNOW THE COCHAIR IS VERY INTERESTED IN.
>> I AM COMMITTED TO SUPPORTING THIS.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO DO IT. BUT I THINK THERE'S OTHER BOARD MEMBERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO DO IT.
WOULD LIKE TO SCHEDULE A MEETING WHERE WE COULD REALLY TALK THIS THROUGH. THAT'S THE NEXT STEP.
>> HOW DO WE GET THIS DONE? WHAT'S THE FIRST NEXT STEP.
FIRST NEXT STEP TO GET INTERESTED PEOPLE IN THE ROOM AND SEE IF WE UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THE
PROBLEMS MAY OR MAY NOT BE. >>
>> ARE THERE BOARD MEMBERS AT HOME WHO WOULD LIKE TO COME TO
MEETING AND TALK ABOUT THIS? >> YOU DON'T HAVE.
>> YES. >> HOW DO IT PUT THIS DIPLOMATIC? THE CODE ENFORCEMENT -- ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DECIDE THE CASES THAT CAME BEFORE US MEET THE CODE OR DON'T MEET THE CODE. AND I'M NOT GOING TO BE IN FAVOR OF US PEOPLE COMING BEFORE US AND SAYING OKAY WELL THIS PERSON NEED TO PUT HIM IN LINE FOR THE COMMUNITY HELP GROUP AND THIS
PERSON DOESN'T GET IN THAT LINE. >> I THINK WHAT WE WANT TO DO.
>> GO AHEAD, MR. BOYD. >> THE MAJORITY OF THE CASES THAT COME BEFORE US HAVE BEEN MONTHS AND MONTHS AND MONTHS AND YEARS OF DEFOOINT NOT TO MEET THE CODE.
NOT TO DO WHAT THE CODE ENFORCEMENT IS ASKING HIM TO DO.
AND VERY FEW OF THEM OF THE CASES OUR PAST CASES OVER THE TOTAL YEARS I'VE BEEN INVOLVED THERE'S ONLY MONEY ISSUE AND CERTAIN NUMBER OF THOSE CASES. MY POINT THE CODE ENFORCEMENT
[01:25:02]
BOARD HERE TO DECIDE WHETHER CASES MEET OR NOT MEET THE CODE.NOT WHO MEETS CHARITY. THAT'S A TOTALLY SEPARATE ISSUE.
I DON'T KNOW WHY WE ARE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION.
>> I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU. BUT WE HAVE AN EXISTING EMBRYONIC SYSTEM. THAT WE HAVE CREATED.
IF THERE'S A WAY FOR US -- HELP FACILITY THAT.
>> WHO GETS CHARITY AND WHO DOESN'T.
>> ALL WE TRY TO DO IS CREATE A READILY ACCEPTABLE POOL OF RESOURCES THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE HAVING DIFFICULTY CAN ACCESS AND SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME TO CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD.
>> THE PEOPLE THAT COME BEFORE US MOST OF THE CASES HAVE MONTHS AND MONTHS AND MONTHS. MONEY IS NOT THE ISSUE.
THEY ARE JUST NOT DOING WHAT THE OFFICER IS ASKING THEM TO DO.
IT'S A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF OUR CASES THAT PEOPLE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO DO THE THINGS. THE CASE TONIGHT.
PERFECT EXAMPLE. THE GUY HAS BEEN OUT OF COMPLIANCE FOR THREE YEARS NOW. AND BOATS, TRAILER, RV'S, SHEDS, THERE'S PLENTY OF MONEY SETTING RIGHT IN THE YARD.
RIGHT. THERE'S NO EXCUSE FOR NOT MAKING THINGS COME INTO THE COMPLIANCE. MONEY IS NOT THE PROBLEM THERE.
>> WE HAD CASE ON DECEMBER 3RD OF MISS HILL, WHERE I THINK LEGITIMATELY THERE WERE -- WITHOUT ESTABLISHING A STANDARD THAT WOULD BE SOME CONCERN ABOUT HER ABILITY TO
COMPLY. >> SHE WAS WILLING TO ASK WHAT
WE ASKED HER TO DO. >> I DON'T THINK HE'S SAYING THAT'S MAYBE WHO HE'S TALKING ABOUT.
>> I DON'T THINK HE'S TALKING ABOUT DOING IT FOR EVERYONE.
THIS -- TRY TO EXPAND UPON WHAT WE MICHELLE STARTED.
AND MAKE THAT PROCESS BETTER. >> AS THE PEOPLE OF MY COLLEGE SEMINARY USED TO TELL ME. MATTHEW 25 GUY.
25:40 TO BE SPECIFIC. IF WE CAN HELP SOME OF THE FOLKS WHO WE FIND ARE IN COMPLIANCE. THEN THEY DON'T COME TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD. AND IF WE OFFER THEM THEY DON'T DO IT. THAT'S NOTHING.
IT DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU IN THERE'S A LOT OF GUYS OUT THERE JUST THUMBING THEIR NOSE WHAT'S GOING ON.
INCLUDING 409 FIRST STREET WHICH WAS THE LAST MEETING.
THESE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT BOUGHT THE THOMPSON HOUSE AND BAILED.
IT'S NOT AN EITHER/OR QUESTION. THERE'S PEOPLE THAT NEED SERVICES AND HELP THE COMMUNITY. I WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT THAT.
THAT DOESN'T STOP ME FROM GETTING ANNOYED AT PEOPLE.
>> I WOULD ALSO SUPPORT THAT. BUT IT'S NOT PART OF THE CODE
ENFORCEMENT BOARD. >> WE'RE NOT PROPOSING IT'S PART
OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD. >> THEN WHY ARE WE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION AT THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD.
>> BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO SERVE ARE VOLUNTEERS IN THE CITY WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE QUALITY AND MAINTENANCE OF PROPERTY IN THE CITY AS WHOLE. PEOPLE VOLUNTEER HERE.
WE'RE NOT MONOLITHIC. WE WANT TO QUASI-JUDICIAL BODY.
THE PEOPLE ARE SUPPORTING THE COMMUNITY.
AND THERE ARE PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD AT THIS POINT WHO WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE OTHER RESOURCES TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY.
AND YOU KNOW -- >> I THINK WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL THAT EVERYBODY THAT COMES BEFORE THE BOARD YOU GET EMOTIONALLY INVOLVED WITH THE CASE AND DECIDE WHETHER THEY NEED HELP OR DON'T NEED HELP. ALL OUR DECISION -- ALL THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD IS WAS ESTABLISHED FOR TO GIVE THE PEOPLE TO COME BEFORE A BOARD AND DECIDE WHETHER THEY MET THE
CODE OR DON'T MEET THE CODE. >> AND THIS CONVERSATION FROM MY OPINION ON THE RECORD FOR SUNSHINE LAW FOR THOSE THAT ARE INTERESTED INVOLUNTARYING OUTSIDE OF THE BOARD CAPACITY TO FACILITY THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD AND ARE CITIZENS CAN FIND A WAY TO PURSUE THAT AVENUE WITH MICHELLE.
>> ONE OTHER COMMENT. >> I'VE BEEN IN THIS BUSINESS 30
[01:30:03]
YEARS. AND YOU MUST BE VERY CAREFUL.YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN AND I'M SURE YOU UNDERSTAND.
BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO COME IN THAT ARE LOOKING FOR
SOME WAY TO GET -- >> TO SCAM THE SYSTEM.
>> THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE WRITTEN UP BEFORE WE ALL GET -- IT WOULD BE HAPPY TO HELP YOU.
IN WAY I CAN. I HAVE A LOT OF CONTACTS.
BUT I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO A SITUATION WHERE PEOPLE ARE COMING TO US BECAUSE THEY GOT WORD IF THEY MADE BE CODE ENFORCEMENT VIOLATION TO PETE HIS NEEDS.
AT THE SAME TIME COME IN ON SOMETHING ELSE.
UNFORTUNATELY THAT'S WHAT EYE RUN INTO.
>> LET'S SEE IF WE CAN SCHEDULE A MEETING.
SEE WHAT COMES OUT OF THAT MEETING.
AND SEE WHAT PEOPLE HAVE TO SAY. YOU KNOW --
>> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY ONE THING.
>> THIS IS NOT FOR PEOPLE WHO COME BEFORE THE BOARD.
THIS IS TO PREVENT THEM FROM COMING BEFORE THE BOARD.
WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT FALL UNDER THIS CATEGORY.
WE ALL KNOW. THERE'S A SELECT FEW.
AND FOR THOSE FEW IF -- IF I CAN DO MORE THAN HANDING THEM A SHEET OR OFFICER WELLS CAN DO MORE THAN OFFERING A SHEET, AND WE CAN PREVENT DHEM FROM COMING HERE AND WASTING -- IT WOULD BE.
WASTING EVERYBODY'S TIME HERE LET'S DO SOMETHING WITH THAT TIME TO HELP THESE PEOPLE SO THAT WE DON'T SEE THEM BEFORE YOU. THAT'S WHAT THIS IS.
IT'S NOT AFTER THEY COME HERE. IT'S WELL BEFORE THEY COME HERE.
BEFORE EVER GETS TO THIS POINT. >> I THINK IT'S JUST A QUESTION OF GIVING PEOPLE A SET OF RESOURCES THAT THEY CAN OR CANNOT USE. IF THEY DON'T USE THE RESOURCES THEY ARE STILL IN VIOLATION. THEN LET THEM COME HERE.
BUT IT'S -- I THINK MANY OF THE FOLKS.
AND WE CAN ARGUE ABOUT WHAT MANY MEANS IN THIS DISCUSSION.
THERE'S A NUMBER OF FOLKS WHO COME HERE OR DON'T COME HERE BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY, THE FACILITY OR THE RESOURCES TO DEAL WITH THE INSTITUTION.
IF WE CAN DIRECT THEM TO SOME PLACE THAT HELPS THEM THAT'S SOMETHING I THINK PERSONALLY I WOULD LIKE TO DO.
>> I WILL LET HER GO AHEAD. >> IT'S AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION THAT MICHELLE MADE THAT MAYBE WASN'T CLEAR IN THE BEGINNING.
THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE IN TRYING TO HELP PEOPLE WHEN MICHELLE AND CHIP SEE THEY ARE STRUGGLING AND BEFORE THEY COME BEFORE US. THEN SOMEONE IGNORING MICHELLE AND CHIP FOR WHATEVER REASON AND EVENTUALLY ENDING UP IN FRONT OF US BECAUSE THAT'S A VIOLATION, AND WE LOSE OUR FOCUS ON THE VIOLATION AND JUST TALKING ABOUT THIS HEING THEM.
THAT'S A BIG DISTINCTION THAT DOESN'T NEED TO BE OVERLOOKED.
>> I THINK WE ALL AGREE. UNLESS THERE'S A WANT TO CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION. WE WILL TRY TO SET UP THE SMALL GROUP MEETING THEN WE WILL SEE WHAT COMES OUT O THAT.
WE WILL WORK FROM THAT AS WE MOVE ALONG.
THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING OF THE DISCUSSION.
WE WILL HAVE TO TALK TO OTHER AGENCIES AND OTHER PEOPLE ALONG THE WAY. BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT AT LEAST SINCE WHAT? 2002 SEVEN WHEN I CAME ON THE BOARD.
>> THE ONLY THING THAT'S TAKEN LONGER IS THE WATERFRONT.
>> THAT'S NOT NEEDED. ANY OTHER BUSINESS?
>> I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
>> IS THERE A SECOND? >> I WILL SECOND IT.
>> THERE'S A HAND. >> ALL IN FAVOR?
>> AYE. >> PRESENT THE BOARD WITH THE
PREVIOUS CASE. >> THIS IS MR. GREEN.
>> MR. GREEN. >> I'M MANAGER OF SOBER LIVING.
I GOT E-MAIL FROM MICHELLE. I DIDN'T KNOW I HAD TO RESPOND.
[01:35:01]
I CAME TO ADDRESS THAT AND GIVE YOU AN UPDATE.I WANTED TO PROVIDE UPDATE OF COMPLIANCE ON MY HOUSE.
THE RECOMMEND FROM THE BOARDIST GIVEN 180 DAYS TO COME INTO
COMPLIANCE. >> LET ME SUGGEST THIS.
IT'S NOT ON OUR AGENDA. AND WE'RE UNAWARE OF THAT
COMMUNICATION. >> I HAVE E-MAIL.
>> WHAT I HAVE LICENSE THAT WE OBTAINED.
>> GENERALLY CASES COME TO US BASED ON RECOMMENDATION OF VIOLATIONS OR OTHER INFIRMITIES AS THE CASE GOES ON.
YOU ARE NOT HERE YET. IF YOU RECEIVED A LETTER FROM MICHELLE OR MISS BACH YOU SHOULD TAKE IT UP WITH THEM.
AND I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THAT LETTER IS RIGHT NOW.
AND SINCE WE DON'T HAVE A CASE BEFORE US I DON'T WANT US TO BE IN THE POSITION TO ADVICE YOU ONE WAY OR THE OTHER --
>> MAKE AN APPOINTMENT. >> WHO SENT YOU A LETTER?
>> SHE SENT ME E-MAIL SAYING SHE NEED UPDATE ON MY PROGRESS OF COMING INTO COMPLIANCE. I DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS IN TRMD FROM THE BOARD. RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD WAS
180 DAYS TO COME IN COMPLIANCE. >> THAT CONVERSATION IS MORE APPROPRIATE BETWEEN YOU AND MICHELLE.
AND THE STAFF CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD.
I DON'T REMEMBER WHEN THE START OF THE 180 DAYS WAS.
HOW CLOSE ARE WE TO 180? >> FOUR MONTHS.
>> MR. GREEN WE APPRECIATE THE EXTRA EFFORT.
I THINK WHAT WE ARE SAYING THIS WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW UP WITH THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS.
SO THAT THE BOARD DOESN'T NEED TO COMMENT ON THE RECORD FOR
>> THANK YOU FOR COMING. >> WE HOPE THAT IT'S POSITIVELY
I THINK THERE WAS A MOTION AND THERE WAS A SECOND AND ABOUT TO
SAY ALL IN FAVOR? >>
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.